Walsall Academy

DETERMINATION Case reference: ADA2742 Referrer: Two parents Admission Authority: The Academy Trust of Walsall Academy Date of decision: 19 December 2014 Determination In accordance with section 88I(5) of the School Standards and Framework Act 1998, I have considered the admission arrangements of Walsall Academy. I determine that the arrangements do not conform with the requirements relating to admission arrangements. By virtue of section 88K(2) of the Act, the adjudicator’s decision is binding on the admission authority. The School Admissions Code requires the admission authority to revise its admission arrangements as quickly as possible. The referral 1. The admission arrangements (the arrangements) of Walsall Academy (the school), a co-educational school for children aged between 11 and 18 for September 2015 have been brought to the attention of the schools adjudicator as a result of an objection submitted by two parents on 30 June 2014. This objection complained that changes made by the school in determining the arrangements for 2015 following the determination of the schools adjudicator in December 2013 concerning the school’s admission arrangements for September 2014 did not meet what that determination had required, and that as a result the arrangements remained unfair to children living locally because they result in some local children failing to be admitted while others living much further away are allocated places. The objectors also complained that the school’s admission arrangements do not give priority to the siblings of children who are already at the school and that this breaches a requirement of the School Admissions Code (the Code). 2. Both elements of the objection are the same, or substantially the same, as those matters on which the adjudicator had made a decision in the previous two years, and so I came to the view that the objection was one that could not be brought as a result of the prohibition which is described in paragraph 3.3e of the Code. I therefore had no jurisdiction to consider it under section 88H of the School Standards and Framework Act 1998 (the Act). 3. However, having reviewed the school’s admission arrangements for September 2015 as a whole, I was concerned that they may not conform with what the Code requires and I therefore decided to use the power available to me under section 88I(5) of the Act to consider them. I shall set out below those matters which I considered may not conform to what the Code requires. Jurisdiction 4. The terms of the academy agreement between the academy trust and the Secretary of State for Education require that the admissions policy and arrangements for Walsall Academy are in accordance with admissions law as it applies to maintained schools. These arrangements were determined by the academy trust, which is the admission authority for the school, on that basis under section 88C of the Act. 5. These arrangements were referred to the adjudicator on 30 June 2014. I am satisfied the arrangements have properly come to my attention in accordance with section 88I of the Act and it is within my jurisdiction to consider them. I am using my power under section 88I to consider the arrangements as a whole. Procedure 6. In considering this matter I have had regard to all relevant legislation and the Code. 7. The documents I have considered in reaching my decision include: a. the referrer’s form dated 30 June 2014; b. the school’s response to the referral, supporting documents and subsequent correspondence; c. the LA’s response to the referral and supporting documents; d. previous determinations dated 16 July 2012, 3 September 2012 and 17 December 2013; e. the local authority (the LA) composite prospectus for parents seeking admission to schools in the area in September 2015; f. maps of the area identifying relevant schools, the boundaries of the school’s inner catchment area and areas of housing development; g. confirmation of when consultation on the arrangements last took place; h. a copy of the minutes of the meeting at which the academy trust of the school determined the arrangements; i. the academy agreement for the school, entered into on 27 November 2001 as the school’s Funding Agreement, and j. a copy of the determined arrangements for September 2015. 9. I have also taken account of information received during a meeting I convened on 5 September 2014 at the school and in subsequent correspondence with the school and the LA. The Matters of Concern 10. When I wrote to the school on 30 July 2014, I set out the following as matters concerning its admission arrangements for September 2015 which may in my view contravene the requirements of the Code. My concerns were that the arrangements: (i) were not displayed on the school’s website as required by paragraph 1.47 of the Code; (ii) cannot be easily understood by parents, as required by paragraph 14. The arrangements state that the school is part of the specialist schools initiative, which no longer exists, and that the Code applies to the school as to a voluntary aided school, which is inaccurate. Since both statements are misleading this may raise doubts as to what is intended, which means that the arrangements may not be easy to understand as they are required to be; (iii) employ oversubscription criteria which are not reasonable, which are not clear and which may result in unfair disadvantage, contrary to paragraph 1.8 of the Code. I was concerned that the use of inner and outer catchment areas may not be reasonable in the context of local demand for places, that the combined effect of the use of banding and catchment areas may make the arrangements difficult to understand and therefore unclear, and that they may act to unfairly disadvantage some children. I clarified at the meeting which I held with the school that this latter concern related to the fairness of the practices and criteria used to allocate places and therefore referred it to paragraph 14 of the Code where the overarching requirement that these be fair, clear and objective is set out; (iv) include in the arrangements for the admission of external students to the school’s sixth form a meeting with applicants that appears to form part of the process of deciding whether a place is offered, (which would be in contravention of paragraphs 1.9m and 2.6 of the Code), and (v) introduce into the arrangements priority given to applicants on medical/social grounds without this change having been the subject of prior consultation as required in paragraph 1.42 of the Code. 11. At the meeting which I held with the parties, I also pointed out that the definitions of the inner and outer catchment areas used in the arrangements were mutually inconsistent because the former was defined as “all WS3 3 postcodes” together with a number of other defined localities, and the latter was defined as “outside the WS3 3 postcode”. This appeared to me to imply that some localities were in both areas, and that this was confusing, making the arrangements unclear and therefore contrary to the requirements of paragraphs 14 and 1.8 of the Code. Background 12. Walsall Academy is located in the Bloxwich area of Walsall and opened as a sponsored academy in 2003 when it replaced TP Riley School, which had required special measures. The academy sponsors are the Mercers’ Company and Thomas Telford Online. 13. The school is popular and heavily oversubscribed. Information provided by the school shows that since 2004 there have been approximately three applications for each available place each year, and that those originating from what the school calls its “outer” catchment area outnumber those from a defined “inner” catchment area also by a ratio which has generally been approximately three to one. 14. The school’s admission arrangements, as described in the school’s original funding agreement, state that 168 places will be available for admissions to Year 7 each year but they also make provision for this number to be increased in a particular year following consultation. The agreement also says that, if the school is oversubscribed, applicants will be placed in one of five bands using scores achieved on a non-verbal reasoning test, and that 33 or 34 admissions will be made from each of these bands, such that “in the first instance” 60 per cent of places are allocated to children who live in the school’s inner catchment area and 40 per cent to those who do not. For those in the inner catchment area, priority is to be based on proximity to the school, and for those living outside, on those living furthest from their alternative school. 15. The school’s admission arrangements for September 2015 are still based on these principles, and have changed only to accommodate legislative change and in response to previous determinations concerning them since the school opened. There have been three previous determinations. Most recently, in December 2013, the adjudicator determined in response to a late objection made by a number of parties that the school’s arrangements for September 2014 did not conform with the requirements relating to admission arrangements, and criticised these because of the unreasonable effect which they had in the resulting admissions of children living near to the school compared to those living further away. The adjudicator also said, amongst other things, that the combined use of banding and catchment areas was complex and that it was unfair to children living nearer to the school. 16. The Code requires admission authorities to amend their arrangements as soon as possible in order to comply with an adjudicator’s determination.

Load more